Maier v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Maier v. State

775 So. 2d 310, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1459, 2000 WL 192155

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 18, 2000·No. No. 2D98-2043·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Leo F. Maier contends the trial court erred when sentencing him after a violation of probation. The State concedes it was error to fail to reduce the probationary portion of the sentence by time previously served on probation, resulting in a sentence of incarceration and probation that exceeds the statutory maximum. See State v. Summers, 642 So.2d 742 (Fla.1994). We remand for the trial court to amend the sentence to reflect credit for time previously served on probation against the three years’ probation ordered in this sentence. Maier does not need to be present for correction of the sentence.

BLUE, A.C.J., and FULMER and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Leo F. Maier contends the trial court erred when sentencing him after a violation of probation. The State concedes it was error to fail to reduce the probationary portion of the sentence by time previously served on probation, resulting in a sentence of incarceration and probation that exceeds the statutory maximum. See State v. Summers, 642 So.2d 742 (Fla.1994). We remand for the trial court to amend the sentence to reflect credit for time previously served on probation against the three years’ probation ordered in this sentence. Maier does not need to be present for correction of the sentence.

BLUE, A.C.J., and FULMER and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.

Maier v. State, 775 So. 2d 310, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 1459, 2000 WL 192155 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

775 So. 2d 310 (Maier v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related